FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF COLD-FORMED DOUBLE DELTA

HOLLOW FLANGE BEAMS

ESRAA SALAH ELDIN(i), IHAB EL-AGHOURY(ii), SHERIF A. IBRAHIM(iii)

(i) Teaching Assistant, Ain shams University, Cairo, Egypt

(ii) Associate Professor, Ain shams University, Cairo, Egypt
(iii) Professor, Ain shams University, Cairo, Egypt,

ABSTRACT

Hygienic design in food processing is an important requirement in controlling

the microbiological safety and quality of the manufactured products. Hollow
flange beams (HFB) could achieve a good agreement with the basic
requirements of hygienic design. HFBs are characterized by their high flexural
capacity resulting from the torsional rigidity of their flanges which is providing
more stiffness, strength and stability than a flat plate flange with the same
amount of steel. However, the flanges are susceptible to local buckling,
crushing or squashing. Moreover, HFBs are difficult to fabricate.
Alternatively, Double Delta Hollow Flange Beams (DDHFB) is proposed as a
new type of cold formed steel sections. It is considered as an extension to the
widely investigated HFBs.
A comprehensive parametric study for the DDHFBs is carried out using the
finite element package ABAQUS to get the best geometric configuration
considering the following parameters; flange width-to-flange depth ratio, flange
depth-to-internal web depth ratio, width of plate performing the DDHFBs
section, thickness of the plate and beam span. In addition, an extended
investigation using FE analysis is conducted to compare the DDHFBs with their
equivalent I-sections with flat flanges. The results indicate that the DDHFBs
show larger load-carrying capacities and stiffness compared to equivalent I-
sections having the same cross sectional area, web depth and flange width.
Finally, ultimate moment capacity based on the finite element models were
compared with currently available design codes and the previously proposed
design rules for other similar HFBs. The suitability of the Direct Strength Method
was also investigated.

KEYWORDS

Cold-Formed Sections, Direct Strength Method, Double delta Hollow flange

beams, Flexural capacity, Rivet fastening, Finite element analysis.
1. INTRODUCTION

The use of cold-formed steel members in low rise building construction has
increased significantly in recent times. It has been suggested that in the future
more than 70% of steel buildings will be constructed using cold-formed steel
sections. The growing popularity of cold-formed steel products is due to their
cost efficiency, ease of fabrication, high strength to weight ratio (specific
strength) and suitability for a wide range of applications. Conventional cold-
formed steel sections are often susceptible to complex buckling modes and
their interactions due to slenderness of sections, reduced torsional stiffness and
the presence of free edges as well as their asymmetric shapes. Over the years,
the use of cold-formed steel structures in construction has increased rapidly,
associated with a significant increase in the interest in its research topics.
In 1990, the Triangular Hollow Flange Beam (THFB) also known as the Dog
bone section was introduced (Fig. 1 (a)). This new beam section provides
improved structural performance in comparison to other open, conventional
cold-formed sections, as well as an alternative to small hot-rolled I-beams [13].
This was followed by the Lite Steel beam (LSB) evolution (Fig. 1 (b)) in early
2000s. The LSB sections combine the stability of hot-rolled steel sections with
the high strength to weight ratio of cold-formed steel sections, and are very
efficient as structural beams since the hollow flanges are positioned away from
the center. Since its inception LSB section has been thoroughly discussed in
many aspects including, lateral torsional and distortional buckling [2,4,5,12],
section moment capacity [3], shear behavior [10,11], and flexural behavior with
and without web openings [16]. However, the LSB production is discontinued in
2012, mostly due to the expensive manufacturing cost associated with the dual
electric resistance welding process. However, there are still interests and
demands in the industry for such sections due to their popularity among
architects, engineers and builders. An alternative manufacturing method has
been introduced based on a combined cold- forming and rivet fastening process
to produce an equivalent section, the rivet fastened Rectangular Hollow Flange
Channel Beams (RHFCBs) (Fig. 1(c)) thus eliminating the costly dual electric
resistance welding process. Experimental and numerical investigations of the
section moment capacity of RHFCBs subject to local and distortional buckling
have been reported in [17,18].
Then a rivet fastened Rectangular Hollow Flange Beam (RHFB) shown in Fig.
1(d) is introduced later. The section moment capacity and the flexural behavior
associated with local buckling effects of RHFB were investigated experimentally
in [19].
As part of the continuing research in this area, a new type of hollow flange
beam known as Double Delta Hollow Flange beam (DDHFB) is introduced in
this study, a simple rivet fastening method is proposed for the manufacturing of
the new DDHFB by connecting two cold formed mono-symmetric hollow flange
beam section MHFB conversely as shown in Fig. 2 at suitable spacing along the
length. The DDHFB sections are providing improved structural performance
where the triangular hollow flange allowed for better connectivity to other
structural members. Moreover, hollow flange sections could provide torsional
stiffness. Thus, DDHFBs can be a potential alternative to C and Z-sections and
other hollow flange section as well as to hot-rolled and welded I-sections thanks
to: (i) enhanced flexural behavior associated with reduced weight; (ii) ease of
producing doubly symmetric geometry; (iii) fast production; (iv) achievement the
basic requirements of hygienic design which is being an important demand in
food processing factories; (v) reduced flange local buckling as there are no free
edges as well as reduced web local buckling as there are 4 joints supporting the
web, (vi) eliminated crushing and squashing in the middle of the flanges and
(vii) eliminated lateral distortional buckling failure which is usually associated
with HFBs and LSBs since the double thickness plate in web in DDHFBs could
delay it. The DDHFB sections are efficient and attractive steel products, which
can be used as bearers, joists and rafters in the residential, industrial and
commercial buildings.
This paper presents the details of the FEM of rivet fastened DDHFBs to
determine the flexural behavior and the section moment capacities including the
inelastic capacity component. This paper describes the details of the parametric
study and presents the results. Comparisons with equivalent I-beams were
conducted. Suitability of current design rules was also investigated.

Fig. 1. Hollow flange sections. (a)Triangular HFB. (b)LSB. (c) Rivet

fastened RHFCB. (d) Rivet fastened RHFB.
 Fig. 2. Steps of forming the rivet fastened DDHFBs

2. FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

2.1. General

A detailed finite element model (FEM) was developed to investigate the flexural
behavior and the section moment capacities of simply supported rivet fastened
DDHFBs. The FEM was developed using ABAQUS / CAE 2016. The DDHFB
test beams were modelled using their center line dimensions. They were
modelled without rounded corners as the effect of rounded corners of the rivet
fastened DDHFB sections were assumed negligible.
Since the modelling of fasteners was consuming long computational time, the
geometric configurations were studied on a simplified DDHFB as shown in Fig.
3, then the effect of intermittent fasteners were taken in consideration as a
reduction factor to get the section moment capacities.
In order to validate the accuracy of the developed FEM, the analysis results
were compared with the validated experimental results of other HFBs since the
DDHFB beams are newly introduced and due to the limited experimental
research of DDHFBs besides the availability of trusted FE models in the
literature.

a b

Fig. 3. (a) simplified DDHFBs, (b) rivet fastened DDHFBs

2.2. Discretization of Finite Element Mesh

A linear shell element, called S4R, was used to develop the FEM of the
DDHFBs. The S4R element chosen in this study uses three translation and
three rotational degrees of freedom at each node, which enable explicit
simulation of various buckling deformations. It accounts for finite membrane
strains and arbitrarily large rotations. Therefore, it is suitable for large-strain
analysis and geometrically nonlinear problems, it also includes a reduced
integration scheme. A sensitivity analysis performed by the authors showed that
an element size equal to or less than b/5 mm and a length of 2b/5 mm in
longitudinal direction were suitable to represent accurate deformations and
yielding of DDHFBs where ‘‘b” is the flange width, and was therefore used
throughout.

2.3. Material Model and Properties

Material nonlinearity in the cold-formed steel beams was modeled using von
Mises yield criterion to define isotropic yielding, and associated plastic flow
theory. The initial slope of the curve is the elastic modulus of the material, and
at the specified yield stress, the curve continues along the second slope defined
by the tangent modulus. In this study, linear elastic/ perfect-plastic material was
adopted. The elastic modulus E and Poisson’s ratio were taken as 200,000
MPa and 0.3, respectively, and the tangent modulus was taken as zero. The
yield stress of the steel sheets was 240 MPa.

2.4. Initial Geometric Imperfections and Residual Stresses

An initial geometric imperfection value measured out of straightness of

span/1000 was adopted as the overall geometric imperfection in the finite
element models for the FE models in this study [6], and a value of d/100 was
considered as the fabrication tolerance for the local plate imperfection where ‘‘d”
is the section inclined depth [9,14].
In order to introduce the imperfection, the ABAQUS “IMPERFECTION” option
was used with the value of eigenvector obtained from an elastic buckling
analysis. This includes lateral displacements, cross-section distortion and twist
rotation, the obtained buckling mode was used to input the initial geometric
imperfection in the nonlinear analysis.
In this study, no residual stresses were considered as the effect of membrane
residual stresses resulting from welding process were assumed negligible. Also,
since the FE model does not consider the beneficial increase in yield stress due
to cold-forming at the corners (strain hardening), flexural residual stress
component that may be present in the corners was also not considered. This is
because both effects are likely to offset one another and the overall net effect is
considered to be small [15].
2.5. Load and Boundary Conditions

Two types of finite element model of DDHFB flexural members were developed,
namely, the experimental and ideal models.
(a) A four-point bending arrangement load is developed in order to simulate the
experimental test results of validated hollow flanges sections mainly LSB
sections for comparison with the corresponding lateral buckling tests.
Vertical and horizontal loads were applied at L/4 from the two supports to
produce an intermediate zone with pure bending moment while zero shear force
where the moment modification factor is slightly higher than 1.0. The vertical
loads are applied to all web nodes to avoid any stress concentration in the
section. A couple of horizontal point load is applied at the top and the bottom
flanges to eliminate the torsion caused by the vertical load which is eccentric
from the shear center of the LSB section.
The boundary conditions in the FE models were applied to simulate the actual
experimental conditions. As described next, ux, uy and uz denote translations
and θx, θy and θz denote rotations in the x, y and z directions, respectively.
Here, “0” denotes free while “1” denotes restrained. In order to simulate the
experiment, the nodes at both end supports were restrained against the in-
plane vertical displacement (y direction), out-of-plane horizontal displacement (x
direction), and the rotation about longitudinal axis (z axis). The longitudinal
displacement (z direction) of the centroid was restrained at one end section
only, but due to the symmetric loading system and in order to reduce analyses
computational time, the FE models were modelled as half-span beams and
symmetric condition (z symmetric) were applied on the other end of the half
section, therefore the longitudinal displacement (z direction) of the centroid in
other end support was released. Fig. 4 (a).
All nodes at first end support: ux=1, uy=1, uz =0, θx=0, θy=0 and θz=1
While the other symmetrical end condition: ux=0, uy=0, uz =1, θx=1, θy=1 and
θz=0 (z-symm.)
(b) The idealized model, used to simulate the behavior of simply supported
DDHFB members subject to a uniform moment, with idealized boundary
conditions. Concentrated moment was applied at two supports to produce
uniform bending moment over the beam where the moment modification factor
will be equal to 1.0 Fig. 4 (b).
The boundary conditions in the ideal FE models were applied similarly as
before, but the restrained translations and rotations were performed on a
particular node (not to the all nodes of the end support edge) which is attached
to all the edge slave nodes by using constraint Multi-Points-Constraints MPC
type BEAM, this provide a rigid beam between particular node and all the edge
slave nodes to constrain the displacement and rotation at this particular node to
the displacement and rotation at the edge slave nodes.
It is worth noting that the ratio of using the four-point loading to the idealized
model in DDHFBs was found to be around 1.03. Although this ratio between the
two methods is small, the idealized model is providing the ideal constraint of
simply supported beam which is permitting the rotation of hinged and roller
supports unlike the experimental models which are providing a little bit of
fixation to simulate the actual test conditions.
a b

Fig. 4. Boundary conditions. (a) Experimental model. (b) Ideal model

2.6. Modelling of Rivet Fastened DDHFBs

The two folded plates (two MHFBs) of the rivet fastened DDHFB are connected
together in web via intermittent rivet fastening. In this study, connector section
was created first using category assembled/complex type BEAM which provides
a rigid beam connection between two nodes. Secondly, positioning the
attachment points to define the location of fasteners. Finally, Point-based
fasteners are created to connect the faces together. Point-based fasteners are
used to model mesh-independent fasteners.
In order to simulate the intermittent weld along the length in the upper and lower
edges of two folded plates (two MHFBs), MPC type TIE was used to model the
intermittent weld in the beam. MPC type TIE makes the global displacements
and rotations as well as other active degrees of freedom equal at two node
regions.
In the FEM of the rivet fastened DDHFBs, two surfaces are in contact (web-
web). Contact surface-to-surface was used to model the interaction between the
two deformable surfaces with the slave adjustment in order to remove the
overclosure of using the fasteners. See Fig. 5

2.7. Analysis Methods

Two analysis methods were used in the study: elastic buckling and nonlinear
static analysis. Elastic buckling analysis was carried out first and was used to
obtain critical eigenvectors for the inclusion of initial geometric imperfections.
Nonlinear static analysis using the RIKS method, which includes the effects of
large deformation (NLGEOM), was then carried out to investigate the behavior
and strength of DDHFBs up to failure. The load is applied proportionally in
several load increments. In each load increment the equilibrium iteration is
performed and the equilibrium path is tracked in the load–displacement space.
 Fig. 5. Modelling of rivet fastened DDHFB

3. VALIDATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODELS

Since the DDHFB beams are newly introduced and due to the lack of
experimental results of DDHFB sections. The accuracy of the developed FEMs
was verified using the experimental work carried out by Anapayan et al. [2] in
LiteSteel beams (Fig. 6). From the results, the FEA shows good agreement with
the test results. The ratio between the two moments (MFEA/MEXP) shows good
results with an average equal to 1.02 and standard deviation equal to 0.04. See
Table 1.

Fig. 6. Experimental test. (a) Overall view of test rig. (b) Support system
Table 1
Section details and ultimate moment of LiteSteel beams
LSB section Span (Mm) Mu,exp (kNm) Mu,FEM (kNm) Mu,FEM/ Mu,exp
300 × 60 × 2 4000 17.17 17.85 1.04
300 × 60 × 2 3000 18.09 17.69 0.98
250 × 75 × 2.5 3500 34.13 32.76 0.96
200 × 45 × 1.6 3000 9.24 9.72 1.05
150 × 45 ×2 2000 10.76 11.4 1.06
Avg. 1.02
St. dev. 0.04

In addition to the ultimate moment results, the vertical displacement of the

specimens is studied to check the behavior of the specimen during the loading
steps. Fig. 7 (a, b) shows the moment versus vertical deflection curves and
moment versus lateral deflection curves of 250 × 75 × 2.5 LSB of 3.5 m span.

Fig. 7. Moment versus: (a) Vertical deflection. (b) Horizontal deflection.

4. PARAMETRIC STUDY

The parametric study is performed using finite element analysis (FEA) to

investigate the effect of changing the cross-section geometric configurations on
the strength of the DDHFB sections. As shown in Fig. 8, the chosen beams
have cross section made of thin plate of thickness (t) and the total width of the
plate forming the DDHFB section (Lp). The total plate width forming the HFB
section can be calculated as follows:

Lp = 2hw + 4b + 4di (1)

Where: di is the inclined depth of the hollow flanges, b is the width of the hollow
flange, hw is the depth of the hollow flange, h1 is the depth of the triangular
hollow flange and h2 is the web depth between the two hollow flanges.
The variable parameters considered can be summarized as follows:
-The aspect ratio of the flange (b/h1) is ranged from 0.8 to 1.2,
-The depth ratio (h1/h2) is ranged from 0.15 to 1.00,
-The total plate width forming the DDHFB section (Lp), and is taken equal to
900, 1500 and 2000 mm,
- The beam thickness (t) is taken constant for the same (L p), t=1 for Lp=900, t=2
for Lp=1500 and t=2.5 for Lp=2000. It is worth noting that these thicknesses
were chosen in order to provide a non-compact or slender section.
-The span of the beam (L), and is taken equal to 6000, 8000 and 10000 mm.

Fig. 8. DDHFB geometric configurations

A few beams failed by section yielding and local buckling (of non-compact and
slender components), while some other beams exhibited a primarily elastic
global buckling failure. See Fig. 9 (a, b).

Fig. 9 (a). Yielding and local buckling.

 b

Fig. 9 (b). Lateral torsional buckling (global)

4.1. Effect of Flange Aspect Ratio:

Fig. 10 shows curves illustrating the relationship of the normalized ultimate

moment (Mu/My) versus the flange aspect ratio (b/h1) for models with Lp equals
to 900, 1500 and 2000 mm, respectively.
The same trend is found in the most of specimens, as the flange aspect ratio
increases, the normalized ultimate moment increases almost linearly for all the
depth ratios (h1/h2) less or equal to 0.375.
For specimens having same depth ratios (h1/h2) equal to 0.5, Mu/My increases
as (b/h1) increases until it reaches its maximum value at b/h1 equals to 1.0 then
decreases again at b/h1 equals to 1.2.
For specimens having depth ratios (h1/h2) ranged between 0.75 and 1.00, as
the flange aspect ratio increases, the normalized ultimate moment decreases
slightly.

4.2. Effect of Depth Ratio:

Fig. 11 shows curves illustrating the relationship of the normalized ultimate

moment (Mu/My) versus the depth ratio (h1/h2) for models with Lp equals to 900,
1500 and 2000 mm, respectively.
In the most of specimens, it is noticed that the capacity of beams increases with
the increase of the depth ratio (h1/h2) until it reaches its maximum value at h1/h2
equals to 0.5 then it becomes almost constant for depth ratios (h1/h2) larger than
0.5 as there is no attaining in the strength of the beams when larger depth ratios
are used. In addition, as the flange width increase, the section moment
capacities increase for beams with depth ratio h1/h2 less than or equal to 0.5.
From the previous investigation, it can be included that the recommended
geometric configurations which can be used in practice are following this
equation as shown in Fig. 12:
h b
(h1 )recommended = 1.1 − 0.6(h ) (2)
2 1
 Fig. 10. Normalized ultimate moment (Mu/My) versus flange aspect ratio
5. COMPARISON WITH THE EQUIVALENT I-SECTIONS

In the current analysis, the unsupported lengths (Lb) of the beams were equal to
span lengths as they were laterally braced only at the supports. To allow the
comparison between DDHFB section and I- sections with flat flanges, two
beams, one of each type, having the same cross sectional area (A), flange
width (Bf), web thickness (t) as well as the same web depth (h) were compared.
The thickness of the plate width forming the DDHFBs was chosen to provide a
non-compact section in all the studied beams. The flange aspect ratio b/h 1 was
taken equal to unity. It should also be mentioned that the chosen flange width
(Bf) is half the beam depth (h). Then, the flange thickness (tf) of the B.U.S was
obtained by equality the two areas: tf = (Bf+2di)*t / Bf
Fig. 11. Normalized ultimate moment (Mu/My) versus depth ratio

0.7

0.6
Depth ratio h1/h2

0.5

0.4
(h1/h2) = 1.1 - 0.6 (b/h1)
0.3 R² = 0.9994
0.2

0.1

0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
flange aspect ratio B/h1

Fig. 12. Recommended geometric Configuration

The strength of DDHFB sections were investigated using FE models for
different beam depths 300, 400, 500 & 600 for medium to long spans (larger
than 8 m) in order to investigate the lateral torsional buckling of these beams.
The strength of the equivalent I- sections was conducted using Egyptian Code
of Practice for Steel Structure (LRFD).

Fig. 13 shows the section moment capacities of such beams for various beams
span lengths. The results indicate that the DDHFBs show larger load-carrying
capacities and stiffness compared to equivalent I-sections having the same
cross sectional area, web depth and flange width.

Fig. 13. Comparison between DDHFBs and equivalent B.U.S sections

6. COMPARISON WITH CURRENT DESIGN RULES:

Experimental and finite element analyses reveal the presence of at least three
buckling modes for HFB flexural members, namely, local, lateral distortional and
lateral torsional buckling. Current design rules consider three distinct regions
including local buckling/yielding, inelastic and elastic buckling regions, which
correspond to the above buckling modes.

6.1. AS/NZS 4600 and AISI S100 Design Method

6.1.1. Current design rules for the local buckling / yielding region:

The section moment capacity (Ms) of a cold-formed steel section is usually

based on the initiation of yielding in the extreme compression fibre in the
Australian cold-formed steel structures standard AS/NZS4600 [8].
Effects of local buckling are accounted for using the effective widths (be) of
slender elements in compression in the calculation of effective section modulus
(Ze) (Eq. (3)). This accounts for the reduction in the strength due to local
buckling effects with increase in member slenderness. The section moment
capacity (Ms) is given by Eq. (3), where fy is the yield stress:
Ms=Fy Ze (3)
It is noted that the design provisions in AS/NZS 4600 [8] are identical to those of
North American Specification AISI S100 [1] and hence the comparisons and
findings are the same for both design standards.
6.1.2 Current design rules for inelastic and elastic buckling region:

Australian/New Zealand Standard for Cold Formed Sections, AS/NZS 4600-

2005 [8], provides equations for moment capacity under lateral distortional
bucking mode. These equations can be applied for hollow flange beams where
the beams subjected to distortional buckling involves transverse bending of a
vertical web with lateral displacements of the compression flange. The nominal
member moment capacity Mb is given by Eq. (4)
Ze
Mb = Mc (4)
Z

The critical moment (Mc) for beams subjected to lateral distortional buckling can
be calculated as follows:
Mc = My for λd< 0.59 (5-a)
0.59
Mc = My for 0.59 <λd<1.7 (5-b)
λd

1
M c = λ2 M y for λd>1.7 (5-c)
d

My
And λd = √M (6)
crd

The critical moment based on AS/NZS 4600-1996 [7] is given by

λd 2
Mc = (1 − )My for λd<1.414 (7-a)
4
1
M c = λ2 M y for λd>1.414 (7-b)
d

Where Mc is the critical lateral distortional buckling moment, My is the moment

causing yield at the extreme compression fiber of the full section, λd is the
slenderness ratio of section subjected to LDB, Z is the full elastic section
modulus, Ze is the effective section modulus at a stress corresponding to Mc/Z
and Mcrd is the elastic lateral distortional buckling moment. It can be calculated
using Pi and Trahair’s [13] equations or from finite element elastic buckling
analysis as the eigenvalue of the first mode of buckling of the specimen or from
an elastic buckling analysis program such as Thin-Wall or CUFSM.
The ultimate moment capacities from the Finite element analysis are compared
with the above design rules in Fig. 14 in a non-dimensional format of moment
capacity (Mu/My) versus member slenderness (λd) where the ultimate moment
capacities (Mu) and the elastic buckling moments (Mcr) were obtained from FEA.

1.20
FEM RESULTS
1.00
AS/NZS 4600-(1996)
0.80
Mu/My

AS/NZS-4600,(2005)
0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000
λd
Fig. 14. Comparison the section moment capacity with AS/NZS 4600
prediction Eqs.(5, 7)

This comparison shows the unconservative predictions of AS/NZS 4600 [7]

design rules while the current design rules in AS/NZS 4600 [8] design rules are
found to be conservative in the inelastic buckling region (intermediate
slenderness) while it is adequate in the elastic buckling region.

Anapayan & Mahendran [4] conducted design rules for hollow flange sections
subject to lateral distortional buckling by using a member slenderness
parameter modified by K, where K is a function of GJ f / EIxweb which was found
to be a critical parameter in evaluating the lateral distortional buckling.
1
K= ≥ 0.9 (8)
0.85+√GJf /EIxweb
Mc = My for kλd < 0.52 (9-a)
Mc = [0.199(Kλd )2 − 1.013 Kλd + 1.475]My for kλd > 0.52 (9-b)

Where (GJf) is the torsional rigidity of the flanges and (EIxweb) is the flexural
rigidity of web.
Furthermore, they found that these new design rules are suitable to predict the
moment capacities of other types of hollow flange sections such as triangular
HFBs, MHFBs and RHFBs.

In order to validate the applicability of previous equations on the section

moment capacity of DDHFBs, another comparison was conducted herein as
shown in Fig. 15. The non-dimensional moment capacity is plotted as Mu/ My on
the vertical axis whereas the non-dimensional member slenderness Kλd is
plotted on the horizontal axis, where K is a function of (GJf/EIxweb) which defined
as before.
The improved design rules introduced by Anapayan & Mahendran [4] produced
a good prediction for the moment capacity of DDHFBs and allowed the
development of accurate design rules for inelastic and elastic region.

1.20 FEM RESULTS

1.00 Tharmarajah Anapayan,

Mahen Mahendran 2012
0.80
Mu/My

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0.0000 1.0000 2.0000 3.0000 4.0000
k λd

Fig. 15. Comparison the section moment capacity with improved design
rules of Anapayan & Mahendran [4] Eqs.(8-9)

But as it can be seen in Fig. 14 and Fig. 15, there was considerable moment
capacity beyond the first yield point, which indicates that DDHFBs are capable
of achieving their plastic moment capacities.
Since AS/NZS4600 [8] and Anapayan & Mahendran [4] equations do not allow
the inelastic reserve bending capacity and considers only the first yield moment
capacities, it leads to conservative predictions for compact and non-compact
DDHFB sections.

6.2. Direct Strength Method (DSM) for Cold-Formed Steel Beams

The Direct Strength Method (DSM) is an alternative design method, providing a

more straightforward method to compute the section moment capacities of
sections given that the elastic buckling (Mcr) and first yield (My) moments are
known. The DSM can be found in the Australian/New Zealand Standard for
cold-formed steel structures, AS/ NZS 4600 [8] as well as the AISI S100
Standard [1]. The main idea behind this method is the determination of all
elastic instabilities, i.e. local Mcrℓ, distortional Mcrd, Lateral torsional buckling
Mcre and the bending moment that causes yield My. The smallest moment
among Mcrℓ, Mcrd, Mcre and My identifies the bending resistance of the section.
The nominal section moment capacity for lateral torsional buckling (Mcre) of
sections symmetric about the axis of bending can be calculated using Eq. (10).
For Mcre ≤ 0.56 My : Mne = Mcre (10-a)
10 10My
For 2.78 My ≥ Mcre ≥ 0.56 My : Mne = My (1 − 36M ) (10-b)
9 cre

For Mcre > 2.78 My : Mne = My (10-c)

While the nominal section moment capacity for local buckling (M nl) can be
calculated using Eq. (11)

For λl ≤ 0.776: Mnl = Mne (11-a)

M 0.4 Mcrl 0.4

For λl > 0.776: Mnl = ((1 − 0.15 ( Mcrl ) )) ( ) Mne (11-b)
ne Mne

M
and λl = √M ne (12)
crl
And the nominal section moment capacity for distortional buckling (Mnd) can be
calculated using Eq. 13
For λd ≤ 0.673: Mnd = My (13-a)

0.5 0.5
Mcrd Mcrd
For λd > 0.673: Mnd = ((1 − 0.22 ( ) )) ( ) My (13-b)
My My

My
and λd = √M (14)
crd
In 2012, the AISI S100 standard [1] included a new provision for inelastic
reserve capacity in bending (where Mn>My). Symmetric cold-formed steel
beams achieve inelastic reserve bending capacity through the ability of the
cross-section to sustain higher compressive strains before inelastic local,
distortional or lateral buckling occurs. However, this inelastic reserve capacity is
not yet included in the DSM provision of AS/NZS standard [8].
The nominal strength considering inelastic reserve capacity for lateral torsional
buckling is given by Eq. (15) instead of Eq. (10-c)
√My /Mcre −0.23
for Mcre > 2.78My : Mne = Mp − (Mp − My ) ≤ Mp (15)
0.37

While for local buckling is given by Eq. (16) instead of Eq. (11-a)
1
For λl ≤ 0.776: Mnl = My + (1 − C 2)( (Mp − My ) (16)
yl
0.776
and Cyl = √ ≤3 (17)
λl
And for distortional buckling is given by Eq. (18) instead of Eq. (13-a)
1
For λd ≤ 0.673: Mnd = My + (1 − C 2 )( (Mp − My ) (18)
yd
0.673
and Cyd = √ ≤3 (19)
λd
Fig.16 compare the FEA results of DDHFBs with the DSM plot of local,
distortional and lateral torsional buckling.
It was found that the FEM results are in good agreement with the prediction of
direct strength method. Therefore, the current DSM is considered to be
recommended as alternative to the AS/NZS4600 [8] prediction.

1.40 FEM RESULTS

1.20 DSM (local buckling)

1.00 DSM (distortional buckling)

0.80
Mu/My

DSM (torsional buckling)

0.60 inelastic reserve capacity

(local buckling)
0.40 inelastic reserve capacity
(distotional buckling)
0.20 inelastic reserve capacity
(torsional buckling)
0.00
0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000
λ
Fig. 16. Comparison the section moment capacity with DSM prediction
Eqs.(23-32)

In addition, the DSM provision in the new AISI S100 design standard [1] is
including the inelastic reserve capacity of cold-formed steel sections which can
predict the section moment capacities of DDHFBs reasonably well in all the
buckling regions. For DDHFBs sections with equal flange and web yield
stresses, their Mp/My ratios are equal to shape factor S/Z ratios, and on average
is 1.23.

7. REDUCTION IN THE MOMENT CAPACITY IN RIVET FASTENED DDHFBs

Since the modelling of rivet fastened beams were consuming long

computational time in analysis, the previous investigation were applied on
simplified DDHFBs to predict the section moment capacities of DDHFBs as
indicated before, but still there is a need to introduce a separate reduction factor
to account for the effect of intermittent rivet fastening (lack of continuity along
the web) on the section moment capacity of DDHFBs.
Accordingly, a total of eight rivet fastened DDHFB beams were modelled herein.
The results indicate that rivet fastened DDHFBs decrease the section moment
capacities. The percentage of reduction in the moment capacity from welded to
rivet fastened is 10% on average and 19% at extreme case as can be seen in
Tables 2.
Table 2
Comparison of section moment capacity of welded DDHDBs with rivet
fastened DDHFBs
fastened Mcr Mu
welded DDHFBs (fas) (fas)
span Lp b/h1 h1/h2 Hw b h1 h2 DDHFBs 250 mm / Mcr / Mu
spacing (weld) (weld) failure
Mcr Mu Mcr Mu
6000 900 0.8 0.25 265 35 44 177 7.75 7.86 7.20 6.36 0.93 0.81 LTB
6000 900 0.8 0.38 238 41 51 136 12.22 9.84 11.13 8.72 0.91 0.89 LTB
6000 900 1 0.50 204 51 51 102 13.80 12.21 13.829 11.10 1.00 0.91 LB
6000 900 1.2 1.00 159 63 53 53 8.89 9.24 8.80 8.89 0.99 0.96 LB
8000 900 1 0.50 204 51 51 102 13.80 11.15 13.591 9.71 0.98 0.87 LB
8000 1500 0.8 0.15 506 47 58 390 30.26 28.57 29.209 27.25 0.97 0.95 LTB
8000 1500 1 0.50 340 85 85 170 110.63 71.44 108.44 64.67 0.98 0.91 LB
8000 1500 1.2 1.00 264 106 88 88 70.46 52.40 70.164 47.69 1.00 0.91 LB

8. CONCLUSION

This paper has described the details of finite element models to investigate the
flexural behavior of rivet fastened DDHFBs. The FEM is verified with the
experimental results of other HFB since the DDHFBs are newly introduced and
no experimental results are valid. The results showed a very good agreement in
terms of the ultimate moment as well as the load-deformation behavior.
Therefore, the model is considered to be accurate enough to predict the flexural
behavior of the DDHFBs. A comprehensive parametric study is carried out
using the finite element package ABAQUS to get the best geometric
configuration of the simplified DDHFBs and a simple equation is proposed for
recommended geometric configurations. Comparisons with the equivalent I-
sections were conducted in order to investigate the behavior and strength of the
new introduced DDHFB sections. The results indicate that the DDHFBs show
larger load-carrying capacities and stiffness compared to equivalent I-sections.
In addition to their benefits in weight saving. The suitability of current design
rules has been investigated, AS/NZS 4600 predictions showed that it is
conservative in the inelastic buckling region (intermediate slenderness) while it
is adequate in the elastic buckling region in addition to their conservative
predictions for compact and non-compact DDHFB sections as they do not allow
the inelastic reserve bending capacity and considers only the first yield moment
capacities. Current Direct Strength Method (DSM) based design equation was
found to be suitable in predicting the section moment capacity of DDHFBs in all
the buckling regions as they are including the inelastic reserve capacity of cold-
formed steel sections. The effect of intermittent rivet fastening was investigated
on the section moment capacity of DDHFBs and a separate reduction factor
was proposed.

REFERENCES

[1] AISI (2012). North American specification for the design of cold-formed steel
structural members. Washington (DC, USA): American Iron and Steel Institute.
[2] Anapayan, T., Mahendran, M., & Mahaarachchi, D. (2011a). Lateral
distortional buckling tests of a new hollow flange channel beam. Thin-Walled
Structures, 49, 13–25.
[3] Anapayan, T., Mahendran, M., & Mahaarachchi, D. (2011b). Section
moment capacity tests of LiteSteel beams. Thin-Walled Structures, 49, 502–
512.
[4] Anapayan, T , & Mahendran, M . (2012a) .Improved design rules for hollow
flange sections subject to lateral distortional buckling, Thin-Walled Structure,
50, 128–140.
[5] Anapayan, T , & Mahendran, M . (2012b) .Numerical modelling and design
of LiteSteel Beams subject to lateral buckling, Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, 70, 51–64.
[6] AS 4100-1998. (1998). Steel Structures, Standards Australia, Sydney,
Australia.
[7] AS/NZS 4600-1996. (1996). (CFS) structures, Standards Australia, Sydney,
Australia.
[8] AS/NZS 4600-2005. (2005). (CFS) structures, Standards Australia, Sydney,
Australia.
[9] Dempsey, R.I. (1993), Hollow Flange Beam Member Design Manual, Palmer
Tube. Technology Pty.
[10] Keerthan, P., & Mahendran, M. (2013). Experimental studies of the shear
behaviour and strength of LiteSteel beams with stiffened web openings,
Engineeing Structure, 49, 840–854.
[11] Keerthan, P., Hughes, D., & Mahendran, M. (2014). Numerical studies and
design of hollow flange channel beams subject to combined bending and shear
actions, Engineeing Structure, 75, 197–212.
[12] Kurniawan, C. W., & Mahendran, M. (2009). Elastic lateral buckling of
simply supported LiteSteel beams subject to transverse loading, Thin-Walled
Structure, 47, 109–119.
[13] Pi, Y.-L., & Trahair, N. S. (1997). Lateral distortional buckling of hollow
flange beams. ASCE: Journal of Structural Engineering, 123(6), 695–702.
[14] Schafer BW, Pekoz T. (1998). Computational modelling of cold-formed
steel: characterizing geometric imperfections and residual stress. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 47, 193–210.
[15] Schafer BW, Li Z, Moen CD (2010). Computational modeling of cold-
formed steel. Thin-Walled Structures, 48, 752-762.
[16] Seo, J.K., & Mahendran, M. (2011). Plastic bending behaviour and section
moment capacities of mono-symmetric LiteSteel beams with web openings,
Thin-Walled Structures, 49, 513–522.
[17] Siahaan, R., Mahendran, M., & Keerthan, P. (2016a). Section moment
capacity tests of rivet fastened rectangular hollow flange channel beams.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 125, 252–262.
[18] Siahaan, R., Keerthan, P., & Mahendran, M. (2016b). Finite element
modeling of rivet fastened rectangular hollow flange channel beams subject to
local buckling. Engineering Structures, 126(2016), 311–327.
[19] Wanniarachchi, K.S. & Mahendran, M. (2017). Experimental study of
the section moment capacity of cold-formed and screw-fastened rectangular
hollow flange beams. Thin-Walled Structures, 119, 499-509.